Objective To compare quality of care in for-profit and notfor-profit nursing homes. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies and randomised controlled trials investigating quality of care in for-profit versus not-forprofit nursing homes. Results A comprehensive search yielded 8827 citations, of which 956 were judged appropriate for full text review. Study characteristics and results of 82 articles that met inclusion criteria were summarised, and results for the four most frequently reported quality measures were pooled. Included studies reported results dating from 1965 to 2003. In 40 studies, all statistically significant comparisons (P<0.05) favoured not-for-profit facilities; in three studies, all statistically significant comparisons favoured for-profit facilities, and the remaining studies had less consistent findings. Meta-analyses suggested that not-for-profit facilities delivered higher quality care than did for-profit facilities for two of the four most frequently reported quality measures: more or higher quality staffing (ratio of effect 1.11, 95% confidence interval 1.07 to 1.14, P<0.001) and lower pressure ulcer prevalence (odds ratio 0.91, 95% confidence interval 0.83 to 0.98, P=0.02). Non-significant results favouring not-for-profit homes were found for the two other most frequently used measures: physical restraint use (odds ratio 0.93, 0.82 to 1.05, P=0.25) and fewer deficiencies in governmental regulatory assessments (ratio of effect 0.90, 0.78 to 1.04, P=0.17). Conclusions This systematic review and meta-analysis of the evidence suggests that, on average, not-for-profit nursing homes deliver higher quality care than do for-profit nursing homes. Many factors may, however, influence this relation in the case of individual institutions. INTRODUCTIONNursing homes provide long term housing, support, and 24 hour nursing care for people who are unable

Treatment with the thiazolidinedione troglitazone in human patients with type 2 diabetes decreases intra-abdominal fat mass but does not affect total body fat or weight. This potentially valuable effect points to a differential action on insulin sensitivity in different adipose tissue depots.

No abstract

Background Obtaining reliable estimates of the health-related quality of life (HR-QoL) of people with predementia Alzheimer’s disease [AD] (preclinical or prodromal AD), mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia is essential for economic evaluations of related health interventions. Aims To provide an overview of which quality of life instruments are being used to assess HR-QoL in people with predementia AD, MCI or dementia; and, to summarise their reported HR-QoL levels at each stage of the disease and by type of respondent. Methods We systematically searched for and reviewed eligible studies published between January 1990 and the end of April 2017 which reported HR-QoL for people with predementia AD, MCI or dementia. We only included instruments which are preference-based, allowing index scores/utility values to be attached to each health state they describe based on preferences obtained from population surveys. Summary results were presented by respondent type (self or proxy), type of instrument, geographical location and, where possible, stage of disease. Health state utility values derived using the EuroQoL 5-Dimensions (EQ-5D) were meta-analysed by pooling reported results across all studies by disease severity (MCI, mild, mild to moderate, moderate, severe dementia, not specified) and by respondent (person with dementia, carer, general public, not specified), using a fixed-effects approach. Results We identified 61 studies which reported HR-QoL for people with MCI or dementia using preference-based instruments, of which 48 used the EQ-5D. Thirty-six studies reported HR-QoL for mild and/or moderate disease severities, and 12 studies reported utility values for MCI. We found systematic differences between self-rated and proxy-rated HR-QoL, with proxy-rated utility valued being significantly lower in more severe disease states. Conclusions A substantial literature now exists quantifying the impact of dementia on HR-QoL using preference-based measures, giving researchers and modellers a firmer basis on which to select appropriate utility values when estimating the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of interventions in this area. Further research is required on HR-QoL of people with preclinical and prodromal AD and MCI, possible differences by type of dementia, the effects of comorbidities, study setting and the informal caregiver’s own HR-QoL, including any effect of that on their proxy-ratings.

Cardiometabolic syndrome occurs with obesity and consists of pathophysiological factors that increase the risk for cardiovascular events. Soluble epoxide hydrolase inhibition (sEHi) is a novel therapeutic approach that exerts renal and cardiovascular protection. Although sEHi as a therapeutic approach is promising, it could be more effective for the treatment of cardiometabolic syndrome when combined with peroxisome proliferator activated receptor γ (PPARγ) agonists. We hypothesized that the PPARγ agonist, rosiglitazone in combination with a sEHi (tAUCB) will provide synergistic actions to decrease blood pressure, improve vascular function, decrease inflammation, and prevent renal damage in spontaneously hypertensive obese rats (SHROB). SHROB were treated with rosiglitazone, tAUCB or the combination of tAUCB and rosiglitazone for four-weeks and compared with spontaneously hypertensive (SHR) and Wistar–Kyoto (WKY) rats. Blood pressure increased in SHROB (164 ±7 mmHg) and decreased 10 mmHg when treated with rosiglitazone, tAUCB, or tAUCB and rosiglitazone. Mesenteric artery dilation to the KATP channel opener pinacidil was attenuated in SHROB (EMax = 77 ±7%), compared with WKY (EMax = 115 ±19) and SHR (EMax = 93 ±12%). Vasodilation to pinacidil was improved by rosiglitazone (EMax = 92 ±14%) but not tAUCB. Renal macrophage infiltration increased in SHROB and significantly decreased with rosiglitazone or tAUCB and rosiglitazone treatment. Albuminuria was increased in SHROB (90 ±20 mg/d) and was significantly decreased by the combination of tAUCB and rosiglitazone (37 ±9 mg/d). Glomerular injury in SHROB was also significantly decreased by tAUCB and rosiglitazone. These results indicate that even though sEHi or PPARγ agonist have benefits when used individually, the combination is more beneficial for the multidisease features in cardiometabolic syndrome.

AimsZero- and near-zero-fluoroscopic ablation techniques reduce the harmful effects of ionizing radiation during invasive electrophysiology procedures. We aimed to test the feasibility and safety of a zero-fluoroscopic strategy using a novel integrated magnetic and impedance-based electroanatomical mapping system for radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of supraventricular tachycardias (SVTs).MethodsWe retrospectively studied 92 consecutive patients undergoing electrophysiology studies with/without RFA for supraventricular tachycardia (SVT) performed by a single operator at a single center. The first 42 (Group 1) underwent a conventional fluoroscopic-guided approach and the second 50 (Group 2) underwent a zero-fluoroscopic approach using the Ensite Precision™ 3-D magnetic and impedance-based mapping system (Abbott Inc).ResultsGroup 1 comprised 14 AV-nodal re-entrant tachycardia (AVNRT), 12 typical atrial flutter, 4 accessory pathway (AP), 2 atrial tachycardia (AT), and 9 diagnostic EP studies (EPS). Group 2 comprised 16 AVNRT, 17 atrial flutter, 6 AP, 3 AT, 2 AV-nodal ablations, and 7 EPS. A complete zero-fluoroscopic approach was achieved in 94% of Group 2 patients. All procedures were acutely successful, and no complications occurred. There was a significant reduction in fluoroscopy dose, dose area product, and time (p < 0.0001, for all), with no difference in procedure times. Ablation time for typical atrial flutter was shorter in Group 2 (p = 0.006).ConclusionsA zero-fluoroscopic strategy for diagnosis and treatment of SVTs using this novel 3D-electroanatomical mapping system is feasible in majority of patients, is safe, reduces ionizing radiation exposure, and does not compromise procedural times, success rates, or complication rates.

No abstract

No abstract